CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

qa

General-purpose QA verdict for any artifact type

52

Quality

56%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude-plugin/skills/qa/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is a well-structured, actionable workflow with a clear sequence and concrete templates, though it carries some redundancy and a verbose example block. Tightening the MCP/fallback split and trimming the example would improve conciseness.

Suggestions

Collapse the MCP-mode and fallback-mode instructions to share the common QA steps, reducing redundancy between the two sections.

Shorten the worked example to the essential verdict block and reference the output template above rather than duplicating a full 30-line sample.

Express the MCP tool call in native tool-invocation form (or clearly mark it as a schematic) so the actionability reaches copy-paste readiness.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient workflow guidance, but the parallel MCP/fallback explanation and the full 30-line worked example add padding that could be tightened, matching the mostly-efficient-with-some-unnecessary-explanation anchor.

3 / 5

Actionability

It provides the concrete MCP tool name and argument list, concrete fallback steps, a copy-ready output template, and a full worked example; minor gaps (the MCP call is shown as a text block rather than native invocation syntax) keep it just below fully executable.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps are clearly sequenced (Step 0 mode detection, QA Steps 1-5, iterative loop, fallback 1-3) with verdict thresholds as decision checkpoints and an explicit continue-until-pass/fail loop, but it lacks a true validate-fix-retry gate so it does not reach the top anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; the single SKILL.md is well sectioned and signals one one-level reference (qa-judge.md), giving good structure with minor organization gaps rather than the fully split, easy-navigation top anchor.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

45%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description states a clear purpose but is generic and lacks a 'when to use' trigger clause, keeping most dimensions at the midpoint. Adding concrete actions and an explicit 'Use when...' phrase with natural trigger terms would raise specificity and completeness.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with concrete trigger phrases, e.g. 'Use when the user asks for a quality check, qa check, or verdict on code, docs, API responses, or test output.'

Replace 'General-purpose ... any artifact type' with a concise list of concrete actions (e.g. 'Scores artifacts 0.0-1.0 and returns PASS/REVISE/FAIL with actionable suggestions').

Include natural synonym keywords (qa, quality check, verdict) directly in the description rather than only in the body.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The phrase "General-purpose QA verdict" names the domain but the action is minimal/generic, and "any artifact type" is abstract rather than a concrete listed action, matching the anchor for naming the domain with minimal actions.

2 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does ("QA verdict for any artifact type") but provides no "Use when..." clause; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"QA" is a relevant keyword a user might naturally say, but common variations like "quality check" or "qa check" are absent (they appear only in the body), matching the anchor for some relevant keywords missing common variations.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"QA verdict" is a recognizable niche, but "General-purpose" and "any artifact type" make it broad enough to overlap with other QA or evaluation skills, matching the somewhat-specific-but-could-overlap anchor.

3 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Q00/ouroboros
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.